[Stoves] Quick comment on developing international standards -- RE: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures

Wed Mar 23 02:40:53 CDT 2016

Dear Smith,

Thank you very much for making me aware of this debate. I hope this gets
resolved soon.

With best regards,

Sincerely,

Prof.  N. K. Ganguly

On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 1:57 AM, Mitchell, John <Mitchell.John at epa.gov>
wrote:

> Paul,
>
>
>
> Thanks for forwarding Kirk Smith’s email with the abstract on a “Comparison
> of International and Chinese water boiling test protocols.”
>
>
>
> However, given your comment “*It seems that some entities in the
> international leadership of clean cookstoves might be pushing for one test
> without sufficient attention to alternative testing methods,*” I want to
> remind you, and inform others on the distribution lists, about two things:
>
>
>
> 1.   how the ISO technical committee (TC285) working to develop voluntary
> international standards operates; and
>
> 2.   how Working Group #2 – which is charged with developing laboratory
> testing methods, is moving forward.
>
>
>
> ISO Technical Committee 285 (TC285) currently has 28 countries
> participating, and 14 observing, with 10 international organization
> participating as well.  Here in the US, many of our colleagues are engaged
> in the activities of TC285.  We have 99 people from 63 organizations
> participating in the US Technical Advisory Group – with 33 experts
> participating in the four TC285 working groups.  All this is to say – *the
> some entities* *in the international leadership of clean cookstoves* – *is
> us*.  It is your colleagues in the US and around the world – we are the
> international leadership developing testing methods – it is not just one
> person or one organization who is the international leader.  In fact, the
> chairperson of TC 285, the chairs of the national committees, and the
> conveners and project leaders of all the working groups, are responsible
> for staying neutral and not pushing a specific idea.  In addition, these
> leaders are responsible for ensuring everyone has an opportunity to be
> heard and to facilitate a constructive discussion to bring different
> perspectives together.   Also, it is important to note that each country
> gets one vote.  So all the people on the USTAG have merge our perspectives
> into one, and that the USTAG’s vote is just one vote out of 28.
>
>
>
> In addition to keeping all participants in the USTAG informed and engaged,
> EPA and Winrock, with the support of the Global Alliance and the
> participation of TC285 leaders from Germany, Nepal, South Africa, and
> Uganda, have worked to keep all interested parties from around the world
> informed and engaged on TC285 activities, hosting a webinar on December 14
> th to update folks on the progress at the TC285 meeting in Accra that
> preceded the Forum.  That webinar can be found at
> http://www.pciaonline.org/webinars  Additionally, you will recall that
> there was a session at the January ETHOS Conference where we had
> representatives from each of the working groups report on their progress to
> date and upcoming plans
>
>
>
>
>
> Regarding developing laboratory testing methods, Working Group 2 is moving
> forward on two tracks:
>
>
>
> -      Part I is a “Standard [laboratory] test sequence for emissions and
> performance, safety, and durability” which has reached the committee draft
> stage.  In fact the voting on the committee draft has just concluded and
> the working group will soon be meeting to review 68 pages of comments –
> showing how engaged the international community is in developing this test
> sequence.  The purpose of Part I is to provide a standard test sequence to
> establish international comparability in measurements of cookstove
> emissions and efficiency.  There is a lot of flexibility within the
> standard test sequence as well – an option to test at just one or two power
> levels (versus all three), a plancha option, fuels, pots, etc.  So that the
> standard test sequence still wouldn’t have everyone doing the exact same
> thing.
>
> -      Part II is a “Contextual [laboratory] test sequence” which will be
> used for comparability within particular demographic settings.  The idea is
> to attempt to replicate local field conditions, as much as practical, in
> the lab.  Part II is in the early draft stage.
>
>
>
> If you, or anyone copied on this email would like to be engaged in
> developing testing methods, I strongly encourage you to contact your
> country’s standards development agency.  In the US that is the American
> National Standards Institute (ANSI), the contact is Rachel Hawthorne, and
> she can be reached at rhawthorne at ansi.org  Folks outside the US can also
> contact Rachel and she can direct you the standards development agency in
> your country.  If anyone has questions about TC285 generally or about the
> USTAG, please contact me at mitchell.john at epa.gov
>
>
>
> All the best,
>
>
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* stove-bounces at lists.berkeley.edu [mailto:
> stove-bounces at lists.berkeley.edu] *On Behalf Of *Paul Anderson
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 17, 2016 9:22 PM
> *To:* stove at lists.berkeley.edu; Stoves and biofuels network <
> Stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [stove] Comparison of stove testing procedures
>
>
>
> Stovers,
>
> Below is the abstract of a significant comparative study done in China.
> We thank Kirk Smith and his Stove list (different from StoveS) for the
> information.
>
> Spoiler alert:   Here is the punch line from the abstract:
>
> Statistically significant differences
>
> between the two [China and Internatonal WBT] protocols indicate the need
> for further efforts in emission tests and methodology development
>
> before the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol.
>
>
> Yes.  Should we be surprised.   It seems that some entities in the
> international leadership of clean cookstoves might be pushing for one test
> without sufficient attention to alternative testing methods.
>
> Note (in abstract) that:
>
> With longer burning duration and higher
>
> power, the Chinese WBT had statistically higher efficiencies, gas
> temperature, and lower pollutant emissions
>
>
> Sure!!!   Change the duration and power, expect different test
> results!!!
>
> What is clear to me is that there should never be only one set of tests.
> People around the world have very different ways of cooking.  High power in
> China, plancha stoves in Central America, two-arm cooking of thick foods in
> parts of Africa, long-simmering bean-meals vs. quick boil of rice meals,
> and on and on.   The people we are trying to serve want solutions that are
> appropriate for their circumstances.
>
> Observation:  There seems to be a slow-down in the seeking of stove
> testing at the major testing centers that have equipment.   I can be shown
> to be incorrect if any testing centers would give us some statistics of
> numbers and types of tests that are being requested.
>
> Of course I like the importance of emissions testing because the TLUDs and
> other micro-gasifiers consistently give superior results.   But most
> funding in the past has gone to less-qualified stoves.
>
> Paul
>
> Doc  /  Dr TLUD  /  Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>
> Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu
>
> Skype:   paultlud    Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>
> Website:  www.drtlud.com
>
> On 3/17/2016 1:08 PM, Kirk R. Smith wrote:
>
> Can be downloaded from the website below/k
>
>
>
> Efficiencies and pollutant emissions from forced-draft biomass-pellet
> semi-gasifier stoves: Comparison of International and Chinese water
> boiling test protocols
>
> Yuanchen Chen, Guofeng Shen, Shu Su, Wei Du, Yibo Huangfu, Guangqing Liu,
> Xilong Wang, Baoshan Xing, Kirk R. Smith, Shu Tao
>
> Energy for Sustainable Development 32 (2016) 22–30
>
>
>
> Ab s t r a c t
>
> Biomass fuels are widely combusted in rural China, producing numerous air
> pollutants with great adverse
>
> impacts on human health. Some improved cookstoves and pellet fuels have
> been promoted. To evaluate the
>
> performance of pellet-gasifier stoves, efficiencies and pollutant
> emissions were measured following International
>
> and Chinese water boiling tests (WBTs). Compared with traditional stoves
> and unprocessed biomass fuels,
>
> increased efficiencies and lower emissions of pollutants including carbon
> monoxide (CO), particulate matter
>
> (PM), parent and derivative polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) were
> revealed for pellet-gasifier stoves.
>
> However, the calculated emission rates (ERs) of CO and PM2.5 cannot meet
> the ER targets recently suggested
>
> by WHO indoor air quality guidelines (IAQGs). Better control of air mixing
> ratio and gross flow rates of primary
>
> and secondary air supply greatly reduced emissions and increased
> efficiencies. Differences among testing protocols
>
> are the key factors affecting the evaluation of stove performance. With
> longer burning duration and higher
>
> power, the Chinese WBT had statistically higher efficiencies, gas
> temperature, and lower pollutant emissions
>
> (p b 0.10) compared to those obtained through the International WBT.
> Statistically significant differences
>
> between the two protocols indicate the need for further efforts in
> emission tests and methodology development
>
> before the release of a well-accepted international testing protocol
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------
> Kirk R. Smith, MPH, PhD
> Professor of Global Environmental Health
>
> Chair, Graduate Group in Environmental Health Sciences
> Director of the Global Health and Environment Program
> School of Public Health
> 747 University Hall
> University of California
> Berkeley, California, 94720-7360
> phone 1-510-643-0793; fax 642-5815
> krksmith at berkeley.edu
> http://www.kirkrsmith.org/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list go to:
>
> https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu
>
>
>
> --
> This email was Virus checked by Astaro Security Gateway. http://www.sophos.com
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this list go to:
> https://calmail.berkeley.edu/manage/list/reminder/stove@lists.berkeley.edu
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160323/b2022569/attachment.html>